Microsoft is blurring the lines between PC and Xbox One gaming

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

Game consoles have traditionally been defined by being rigid, closed platforms. You’re only allowed to run specific approved software, and the hardware never changes very much. Sure, you might see a new A/V connector or a die shrink pop up, but the horsepower stays the same until it’s replaced completely. Going forward, Microsoft wants to change that by making the Xbox One a lot more like the PC.

While this PC-Xbox lovefest is big news by itself, Microsoft’s Phil Spencer also revealed that this path allows his team to continually refresh the Xbox One‘s hardware. Eventually, that means shedding much of the meaningful distinction between the Xbox One and a Windows 10 PC.

Much like we see with PCs, smartphones, and tablets, Spencer wants to keep the Xbox One’s hardware up to date year after year while maintaining backwards compatibility with older software. He wants a world in which you can play Halo 7 in 4K on your third generation Xbox One while still enjoying Halo 5 on the very same hardware.

While these interconnected ideas are certainly exciting on the surface, we remain skeptical until Microsoft delivers the goods. Infamously, the Games for Windows Live system was a nightmare from start to finish, and similar promises of strong PC support were broken as well. And as far as the updated console hardware goes, that could potentially lead to some serious issues down the road.

Up ’til now, developers have been able to target console hardware knowing that everyone is running on the exact same machine. Everyone experiences the same quirks, and everybody has the same limitations. When you start changing the hardware in a console, that’s no longer true. A game that works seamlessly on first-gen hardware might face a really ugly issue on fourth-gen hardware. There’s no perfect way around that.

Spencer talks a good game about how wonderful it is being able to run old games like Doom and Quake on modern PCs, but that process isn’t always a walk in the park. Compatibility issues frequently pop up when you try to run older games, and they often require either custom modifications or emulators like DOSBox to get things running smoothly again.

Do you think each and every developer will be willing to patch their affected games after a hardware refresh? I don’t — not for one second. And unless Microsoft opens up the Xbox One’s Windows 10-based OS to allow for modding groups to do the work for free, we’ll likely end up in a situation in which swaths of the back catalog function poorly on newer hardware. We certainly don’t envy the mess the 2026 Xbox One support team will be left with.

Tagged In

It’s not really that hard and API’s like DX12 change those major development differences between console and PC. Not to mention, games still have base requirements, even in the PC realm. Eventually, those base requirements move up and your PC can no longer run newer titles. There are some games out there, for instance, that will block out an HD3000 and HD4000 series ATI/ AMD card, and require the base minimum of DX11 card (HD5000 or greater). A final point, Xbox is likely sticking with the same GCN AMD model as the Xbox One uses, this makes backwards compatibility easy. It’s not like each console will be a different GPU/ CPU vendor. So current Xbox One owners will likely not have to upgrade to play the future titles that arrive within the next 3-5 years, as they will meet base requirement and games will also still be optimized to the current console and treated very “console-like.” However, boxes after this current model, will likely operate in a more PC/ Steam Box like fashion.
Face it, the console is dead and a dead concept. With innovations taking place in silicon from desktops, to mobile devices, the console is the only thing not getting upgraded. There are already tablets, as of the past two years, capable of 360 fidelity graphics. The Nvidia Shield being one of those. Back in 2013, Razer was selling a tablet that could run Crysis 3.

close

I thought the point of the console was just that you didn’t have to worry about game compatibility for the whole lifecycle of the device. No upgrades, no “minimum requirements”, no buying OS licenses, etc. You plug it in, go through a short setup process and that’s it. You pop in the disk today and it works, you do it with a new game 5 years from now and it works.

What’s the point in paying $350+ to get a dumbed-down-PC-type device when some games will require you to upgrade it? Why not go for the full PC experience that might cost more but it’s also more flexible?

wow

I don’t think it’s going to go that far… I think the baseline will still be there with a res/fr buff. PCs are so hard for game companies because there are 1000s of combinations of hardware. This is why steam shot them selves in the foot with their consoles.
Xbox is most likely going to keep the same hardware just have more power in a model or external plug in. Most likely, all the Dev will have to do is adjust the res and fr.
The issue with PC is optimization. It’s very easy to optimize to the console hardware’s full potential but hard for PC because of the variety. Batman: Arkham Knight, lazy console port, for example: if I buy a $600+USD GPU like GTX 980 Ti which is arguably one of the best and i’m playing Batman at 1080p 40fps in the batmobile vs a $300 xbox with a steady 900p 30fps which comes with a free game and a controller. I’m not even adding in the extra costs of the CPU and power source to run the computer. Not to mention all the time wasted on troubleshooting games, upgrading and etc. What would you choose?

This is why I don’t get the PC master race. Sure you can have better specs but optimization is key. With XB1’s shitty hardware, every exclusive runs at 1080p with a steady 60fps and with azure(cloud) gaming in the picture taking particle/physics into the cloud it can only get better. DX12 won’t help much with XB1, I don’t think but it will a bit once devs get more use to it.

Overall, similar Xbox hardware will keep dev optimization within the consoles making it much easier to code. There won’t be any intel CPUs or Nvidia, strictly AMD CPU/GPU. Most likely the same memory (maybe more of it), same CPU. My guess the only difference will be just a better AMD GPU aka polaris, better ports like HDMI 2, wifi card and USB-Type-C/Thunderbolt. Even though the USB 3.0 can be adapted to hdmi 2.0 (4k output), enhanced GPU/memory without any bottleneck.

I would be very happy if Xbox came out with an Xbox One Slim with a Polaris GPU, better wifi card, extra memory, SSD or 10,000rpm hybrid, more ports (1xDisplayport 1.3, 1xThunderbolt 3,1xHDMI 2.0, 3x USB3.1 or USB-Type-C or a mix). The CPU can be the same, it won’t really be a bottleneck since games are more reliant on the GPU/Memory now a days. This machine would have no problems being optimized to 1080p 120fps or 1140p 60fps which is better than the majority of TVs at 1080p 60hz. This will be good for those TVs still because at 1080p 120fps people won’t notice a single frame drop since it’s performing higher than your tv is.

For people that already have an Xbox One and don’t want to buy a new one an external graphics enhancer like what razer and alienware have. Just package up more memory and a Polaris GPU USB 3.0 plugin. Also have a USB 3.0 to HDMI 2.0 adapter and a HDMI 2 cable coming with it. There is no mass production GPUs really making this considerably cheaper, it’s obvious it would sell millions.

So much wishful thinking I know. Maybe even get 21:9 into the picture as well.
But what I do know is that Polaris will be the high end GPU for dirt cheap. Can be even cheaper if Xbox makes a deal (rumours that they already did). It is able to push out 1440p (even 4k at 60fps but obviously we won’t see a high end GPU like that in an Xbox unless the thing is like $2000 or something lol) easily with insane performance/watt ratios. 10nm architecture!!!

close

One thing’s for sure: a PC can replace a console but not the other way around. So start with the fact that most people will have a PC in their home (in one form or another) for the foreseeable future. This means that games will keep being made for PCs regardless (with all associated costs for development) and people will keep paying for PCs also.

The reason you “don’t understand the PC mater race” is because you only think about your needs and wants. What do I do *today* if I want to play a 4K game? Or I want to play everything at 60+FPS? Or if I want to use a 144Hz display? Or with maxed out details? A console capable of doing this today would cost as much as a high end PC. No amount of optimization can get this level of performance from the collection of low end hardware in today’s consoles. Most of what a console offers is just “acceptable” by most people’s standards.

And after you buy the console you’re stuck with the same hardware for 5 or 6 years. Which is OK if normal gaming is all you want, not OK if you like eye candy. And once you start refreshing consoles more often there goes the “unified ecosystem” argument.

wow

again, a 980ti won’t always push out 1080, 60fps… Console will for a fraction of the price.
Yes PC is awesome because there are so many options but all the options at the same time is bad. PC Master race proves my point.

If steam was smart they would have mass produced a console of their own and have a 2-3year model sending out a bunch of dev kits along the way.

I would pay $1000 for a steam console that can CONSISTENTLY play the latest games at 1440p 120fps or what ever the cutting edge res/fr of it’s time is. Titan X being $1000 by itself can’t even guarantee that. But then again after 3 years goes by my $1000 steam box will be unusable with some new games due to hardware variety.

Games on the Xbox 360 promised 720p in 2005. They are still 720p to this day some games are even a bit above that.

I’m not sure what you aren’t getting here.
Yes PC has a lot of pros but also a lot of cons likewise with a console. Even though most people yelling PC MASTER RACE probably don’t have a PC capable of running 1080p/60fps for all new games.
Trust me if I had the money to get me and my friends all $1500 PC running games at top res/fr, I would.
You and your likers need some common sense.

close

Well yeah… except those that run at 900p. And at 30FPS. Also with a much lower visual detail level.

But yeah… same thing. Just like a Ford Fiesta does 99% of what a Mustang can do so why would I buy a Mustang if you don’t think it’s a good idea.

wow

It’s a good idea to buy the mustang if you have a lot of highways and it’s your certain price point. This is what I’ve been telling you from the start.

jdwii

You used one crappy game for an example most xbox one games can’t even do 30fps without dropping down to 20

jdwii

Lets also use your 360 argument, you said it did 720P since day one but you do understand that resolution alone isn’t the end all. Crysis 3 for example was running at like low-very low settings and so were most games at the end of the console cycle at 720P(also some titles went a little lower then 720P).

Edit

“again, a 980ti won’t always push out 1080, 60fps… Console will for a fraction of the price.” Lol the only console i seen that can even keep a steady frame-rate for games is the Wii U and that is only 1st party.

If I was rich I would have this. This would guarantee me to have 4k at all times even within the next 4 years (hoping there is no issues with games and nvidia/intel)

close

No can do. Under new rules of “standardized hardware and software” games are optimized for single mid to low-range GPUs. Running on triple titans brings no benefits so there’s no reason to even produce such a GPU.

Right?

wow

I was making a joke.

close

Me too ;).

Bongo the Prdkha

Yeah.. less options are better. these arguments make pcmstr race movement grow stronger… also with steam consoles you contradict yourself. you say that it was pc hw variety that made them fail when in fact they were closer to consoles in spirit so based on that they should succeed. they didnt. as for current developments. common argument of ignoramuses is that wih pc you have to upgrade hw every 2 years or so.ß while with console you get the games to work their best, well.. till the end of generation. if this is implemented directx box may loose playerbase while microsofts restrictive way of distributing content on pc may fail just as games for windows movement did.

Bongo the Prdkha

one more thing. optimisation is cool. nvidia has some nice programs to ease the process. as for your argument, in urhopia where all games would be made on pcs for consoles your argument could be valid but its not. most of released games ( almost all released except shooters, adventures and few rpgs) never see the console light. and without software being able to run on your console, optimized hardware is for 2 things… maybe few years ago id use optimisation argument myself, albeit it would have more holes than emental cheese but now after owning ps vita… never again.

The PC Master race always forgets not everyone can afford a Titan and not all games come out for PC. As long as that’s the case, there’s a place for consoles.

close

Well since we’re talking about Xbox I assume the last point would be rendered moot. Presumably games would no longer be console only but Win10 only.

But going back to the issue of PCs and upgradeable consoles, since when do you need a Titan to play games? Come DX12 any cheap AMD APU will do the job as long as it’s paired with a good discrete GPU. Upgrading a console wouldn’t be cheap either and it would negate the one big advantage consoles have: comfort. They’re a one stop shop, you buy them, they run all games for years to come. If I have to constantly tinker and upgrade then why bother getting one.

A PC may come out as more expensive but not by that much. And it may be worth to invest the extra effort to build one if you’ll end up “building” with a console anyway. You can choose between a $350 console that you have to upgrade or a $500-600 PC. The difference may sound large but also think about a less ethical aspect: 80-90% of PC gamers pirate the games. This makes the $200 difference irrelevant.

wow

You are missing the biggest points: game dev optimization due to pc’s hardware variety vs consoles and plug + play. The only way to guarantee to get 1080p/60fps without worrying about upgrades is getting a fury x, titan x or a 980 but even those can have issues like in batman.
Some games have issues with certain hardware like Nvidia, AMD, Intel and etc.
Why would I buy a 1000+USD computer when I don’t know for sure whether it can play the latest and greatest game well?

Sure the 980 can play games at 4k but others it’s barely pumping out 1080p without tearing like batman in the bat mobile. It’s obviously the dev’s fault and not the gpu’s but why would you want to have that uncertainty?
Another thing is playing a FPS game. I don’t want to hop into a lobby almost every game against an aimbot. How is that fun? Wouldn’t that ruin the experience? Sure there are sweet mods on PC but for a casual player, you don’t want to get in a lobby full of cheating mods.

Steam f*cked up on their consoles. They should have kept strict hardware requirements. Another option would be to choose a certain company to make the hardware of the year much like Google does with Nexus Phones. But then again it takes time for devs to learn certain hardware to fully master optimization so the console of the year wouldn’t really work out unless they just stayed with intel+nvidia or full on amd.

close

If what you’re saying developers should to do a better job at developing and optimizing PC games then I completely agree. But if you’re suggesting that we should “unify” everything into a “standard device” to make it available to everyone then I’m giving you a “HELL NO!”. This sounds… communist. In case you weren’t around back then, it failed.

You want a standard console that includes hardware for ~$400 and then optimize games for that, right? So if I have a $4000 PC and want to enjoy it I can just suck it because you think $400 is the sweet spot? Or if I can only pay $200 for it I can twiddle my thumbs until I save another $200?

“Why would I buy a 1000+USD computer when I don’t know for sure whether it can play the latest and greatest game well?”

Why would your decision matter when I make mine? And how do you expect everybody to make the same decision? When PC’s range from $100 to $4000 how do you expect to reach a compromise that satisfies everybody?

wow

Wow you are thick. I am not speaking about you or me. PC is great but it’s not the norm for a reason. I’m not saying a $400 mid range hardware is better. No where I said that.
Trust me, I would get me and my friends all $1500 gaming PCs if I could afford it not caring about the uncertainties because if I was rich enough to buy those, I can do it every 2 years to have the latest and greatest. Life isn’t always that way.
For me, I bought a $400 piece of hardware that will last me for 5 years running games 1080p 60fps and not worry about my friends/my computer requirements. For my specific situation that was a smart choice.
My social circle are all casual gamers. Graphics are cool and all with us but I would rather have the certainty to run the latest and great game at it’s max potential without me going out to buy a new piece of hardware from bestbuy. For us non hardcore gamers, we don’t notice the tearing like hardcore gamers do and yes i have 20/20 vision. My TVs are a 1080p 60hz except for my Plasma at like 240hz which I never game on.

close

No, talking about you and me would be OK(ish). You are talking about you and you. Just read back from your comments:
-I don’t want to hop into
-I would be very happy if Xbox came out
-I would pay $1000 for a steam console
-if I had the money to get me and my friends all $1500 PC
-Why would I buy a 1000+USD computer
-I would rather have the certainty to run

Somehow you imagine that your budget, your desires, your preferences are shared by most people and are just right, they must be “the norm”. They are not. Obviously there is a huge market for people who want a $1500-$2000 PCs.

I will say it just this one last time and then you can grow up by yourself. You have absolutely no right or qualification to suggest a sweet spot for anyone but yourself. There is no “one size fits all” solution no matter how much you try to imagine it. You seem to think you can come up with the perfect solution. You can’t. There is no ideal HW configuration and no ideal price to satisfy everybody.

And the explanation is clear as daylight: everybody is different. I want a $2000 PC that can play 4K games, someone else wants a $1000 PC that’s totally silent, someone else wants a $400 console that only consumes 100W.
Unfortunately the only point where you are right is that developers should optimize better for PC instead of expecting that the hardware is fast enough to cover for their lazy approach.

wow

Well this took an odd turn… Such a weird point to argue, actually speechless lmao
I guess that’s what happens when you have nothing to back your beloved PC Master Race “facts”. I was at least giving solid arguments from both sides.

close

Not speechless enough I see :). Everybody thinks they’re being discriminated and oppressed by some “master race”. So half of you guys accuse me of being the “PC master race” and the other half that I’m a “console fanboy”. And this happens every time on any topic just to prove to me that when left out of arguments people will resort to all forms of self pity and personal attacks.

I told you already that I agree that PC games should be optimized. The problem is developers are greedy and want to put in minimum effort hoping for maximum profit. Batman is what comes out of this strategy. Yes, hyper-optimizing for a single type of hardware (like the console concept) is a lot easier and will yield better results.
But what is that “single hardware configuration” that you optimize for? Is it based on Nvidia, AMD or Intel? Is it low, mid or high end? Is it $400, $800 or $1500? What if games are optimized for a low/mid range configuration but you want high end and have the money? Or if you don’t have even that $400?

And out of the thousands of games out there you chose the one where the developers really mucked up and generalized it. What about the console games that run at 720p (Star Wars Battlefront) or 900p (Just Cause)? Still claiming they all run “1080p 60fps”?

“For me, I bought a $400 piece of hardware that will last me for 5 years running games 1080p 60fps”
That’s great. That’s what consoles are for. But as time goes by you’ll see more and more games that actually run at 720p or 900p and the graphics aren’t “wow”.
I want eye candy, I want higher high end and can afford it, I want 4K. Why should I have to settle for 1080p just because YOU settled? And why would you have to pay $1500 just because I’m willing to?

There’s room for both consoles and PCs in this world. Freedom of choice implies having a friggin choice. We eat different things, we drive different things, we hump different things, why should we game on the same thing? :)

The only reason this discussion takes odd turns for you is because you insist on lying flat on the asphalt instead of getting up to get some perspective.

Bongo the Prdkha

your arguments while solid in theory have flaws. this article makes your reasoning even less flawed.neverthenless replying to you made me brainstorm some stuff. if you seek enlightment watch tophatsandchampagne but only if you can stand insult or two. he tends to debunk arguments of console deffenders. you unlike those at leas give it a bit thought tho

lopo

“Wow you are thick.”
I was laughing off my chair for that.
You can buy second hand pc for $400 that has better hardware then console have. You can upgrade it with hardware used that don’t cost a lot and still play the new games. Thing is with the console is that when xbone and ps4 come out they already had old hardware and all new games need to run well on these old hardware for 7 years or more. The games on console cost a lot more then on a PC and you do not have brain dead tax on it that allow you to play online like console’s have. You can still use controller on PC if you like one. And new games on console need to be beautiful but to achieve that they need to run maximum 30 fps and most details turned down. On PC you do not need high end graphics card. You can get second hand ATI 270x for $80-100 that will run all new games on medium settings at 60fps but have a lot more detail then console’s have. There are so many reason why I don’t buy console. I have already a PC so why I need a second source that consumes electricity for just play games. Why do I need to pay monthly fee for online gaming when I don’t use the community system. If I need to pay monthly fee then I expect it to be like Netflix and I can play every game I want and don’t need to pay for every one of them separately. If you have money to buy 5 or more $60 plus for one game a year then you cant say you have no money. I bought rise of tomb rider for 20 euro, The devision 35 euro, Batman last game for 30 euro and as it was so bad working they gived all Batman games for free. I bought Just cause 3 for 20 euro. that’s total 105 euro for 4 games. On console it would be 240 euro and that 135 euro would go well for upgrade a part on your PC.

Bongo the Prdkha

once again tendentional, almost nonsense. most games will never be released on any of the consoles, reality check – resolution# and fps issues on next gen consoles. as for me i game on 5 year old pc. some games run like poop but i could never run em on consoles, some games run better and have mods n freedom, some games, minority though, i cant play. back in 2011 this pc cost me around 250 bucks minus hdd, os, monitor all of which i already had from even older pc.

wow

To be honest, if I was a game dev I would probably do what batman did. Like you said, pc gamers pirate everything like I do with TV and Movies. If I was a dev, console would be my only concern due that I can optimize it without having it broken on a certain hardware variation. Why would I spend the extra R&D?
Devs consistently say they that make all their money off consoles. Consoles are the easy solution to all devs. MMOs I wouldn’t bring to console for obvious reasons like kb+m and monthly subscription because we all know how ESO’s monthly subscription worked out on console.
Batman sold roughly 5mil copies on console vs 100k on PC.
Battlefront 10mil console sales vs 500k pc sales.
Battlefront looks absolutely gorgeous on the PC vs Batman sh*tty console port but close to the same sales ratio to consoles. Regardless how much R&D gets spent on PCs. It’s really just a waste of time and money,

Edit also more lols
“, I bought a $400 piece of hardware that will last me for 5 years running games 1080p 60fps” Is there even a game on the “next gen” consoles that run at this all the time? Most games like Far cry can’t even hit 1080P on the xbox one let alone anything above 30fps. New hitman game is running at like 20fps to.

wow

halo 5, forza 6 are both 1080p 60fps.
I should have said 1080p 30fps that is my bad, since there are quite a few.
Fun fact: PS4 has fps issues and xb1 has more 900p games.
Far Cry Primal is 1080p 30fps on both consoles very steadily.
I’m not sure where you get your info from but you should really check out digital foundry.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi8sCPauIvM

Look at VGchartz for any popular sport game or shooter.
Games like MMOs and games needing barely any resources, CS:GO make up most of the PC base. Most of the game are subscription MMOs and yes those do make the money.
There is a certain game for platforms and basically any EA, Ubisoft game is a waste of time when it comes to PC. These are the games I was referring to.
Much like you wouldn’t bring RS, WOW, LoL, Dota to console.

close

@wow, use you logic: games are getting more and more complex visually but the hardware stays the same on a console. How do you imagine they can keep up?
More and more games choose to drop the resolution and the frame rate to keep some visual detail. And I bet it will only get worse.

I upgraded my PC from a 7950OC to a 980OC. This means my gaming PC got a new life and I can enjoy top graphics with a minimal investment. I don’t want to wait 5-6 years between upgrades but I do enjoy my eye-candy :). I owned almost every major console in the last 25 years. This generation is the one that let me down the most.
Compared to the PS3 legacy the PS4 is a wimpy locked down PC.

jdwii

Really i have to stick up for the consoles if jaguar was more powerful things would be better cause a 7870 is a decent 1080P GPU. But jaguar is just to weak to handle it.

jdwii

Well first of all there both a joke in terms of being “next gen” most of the games can’t even do 60fps at 1080P. Hell if anything i’d say the Wii U is more next gen in a way and that console has 12.8GB of bandwidth! I watch digital foundry like its my drug that is were i’m getting my info from and like i said most PS4 games drop below 30fps which imo isn’t even playable.

Xbox one is only weaker! If graphics or gameplay(which i rate framerate is in gameplay metrics) matter the most then PC gaming wins. I tried 30fps and maybe its cause i’m so close to my monitor but it sucks.

wow

I do wish XB1 one was more powerful obviously. That is why i’m hoping for an external gpu enhancer much like the razer and alienware have. I doubt it will ever come but oh well.

close

But then it will cost you another $600. And games will have to be optimized for both the standard console and for the collection of “enhancers” available on the market. So there goes the price advantage, the comfort, the optimizations. You basically end up with a PC but with less possibility to upgrade.

The console is good as it is. Weaker but cheaper. Less flexible but more comfortable. Any attempt to make it more PC like will just ruin it.

Bongo the Prdkha

one thing on that. look at steam sales as representation of pc consumer madness. then number of pcs worldwide is… billions. not all can play newest games but since you can use them for other high spec demanding stuff you may get higher number than directx boxes and ps4 sales combined. since i dont have numbers to support this argument it floats on water and you are free to debunk it

Wussupi83

Seems pretty smart from a business decision, your Xbox One can be like your flagship phone.

wow

They should come out with an external GPU with much more RAM for the Xbox. There are already rumours about the polaris and xbox one. Devs then wouldn’t have to change a thing other than fps and res.

Kyle

“He wants a world in which you can play Halo 7 in 4K on your third generation Xbox One”

I just want a world where I can play Halo 3 on my PC and figure out what happened in the story after the ending of Halo 2.

Marko Novak

I don’t understand this, why would I want to play PS4 on a PC? Whats the point?? Can someone please explain this to me please?

Some games you can only get for consoles. Also, not everyone can afford nice graphics cards.

wow

Because XB1 and PS4 can out perform a PC for the same price point with a plug and play feature.
XB1 is on sale for 250USD at Walmart with a controller and free game at the moment and can play exclusives at 1080p 60fps. Equivalent GPU alone costs that much for the same experience.
You don’t have to troubleshoot games, worry about modded FPS lobbies constantly (BO3 multiplayer is littered with aimbots on PC), worry about crappy console ports (batman), wasted time upgrading.
PC lacks optimization because of the 1000s of hardware variants. The only point in buying a PC is if you spend $1000+ and get something like a 980 TI which runs Batman 1080p at 40fps in the bat mobile but other games at 4k.
You are always worrying about if the latest and greatest game will work/how well it will work on your PC (example would be game-debate comment sections).

Think of a console is a dirt cheap mid range computer that costs the same as a low range computer which can only play CS:GO at it’s highest settings. Which has a much longer life span.

I can buy a game on XB1/PS4 and I won’t have worry about reading up on how it works with it. If it comes out on console it will be around the same res/fr as the next game. All of the newest titles can be played above 900p+, 30fps+. Now devs are getting use to the new console’s hardware and now it’s getting more common to see 1080p/60fps games. Where as if I bought a GPU from 2013 for a PC due to the PC master race principle, it will only go downhill from there and needed to be upgraded in 2 years. I am confident that my system will only get better within the 4-5 year gen bracket due to optimization.

When XB1/PS4 game out, 1080p gaming being the norm was newish (even though it started in 1995 with quake). There promise was to bring 1080p gaming for cheap. Most TVs are 1080p/60hz unless you have a plasma or a real expensive TV.

crizz1066

WOW you really hate PC dontcha :-) I use both PC and PS4 to cover all bases. While you may have to spend a bit more to get started with a PC, they can match consoles pretty easily. Well mine does. Yes sorting out drivers etc is a pain in the arse. But I like quality strategy games, which only really work on PC with mouse. In the long run it looks as if M$ will faze out the X1 it makes no real sense any-more.

wow

Don’t hate PCs. Obviously they can match consoles easily.
Why do you think MS will faze out the Xbox? This is there only entertainment system. You make absolutely no sense.

crizz1066

I don’t see TV as such a big draw etc for the x1, there are so many smaller device that can do the same and for a significantly lower power consumption. It just seems as if M$ have only seen X1 as a cash cow and a way to get into the living room. Once that’s done if you have a PC what’s the point of X1??

wow

thats much like saying, what’s the point in a steam box.

jdwii

Steam machines have always been a joke since windows will always be dominate for years for the OS.

crizz1066

Not really a steam box is a high powered PC with Steam OS. Able to use all PC games an X1 can’t

Kyle

I’m playing Devil’s Advocate here, but SteamOS can’t play all PC games. The operating system is a modified version of Debian Linux, which means that the majority of games will not be compatible without a shift in development priorities.

Valve is working to get more developers on board with this, and seems to be pushing for more open standards that would allow native compatibility between operating systems.

crizz1066

Didn’t know that, I’m lucky all ready got pc. So just upgrade now and again.

Bongo the Prdkha

fortunately on pcs you have nice thing called choice. you need not to stick to one o.s if it does not provide you all you require. on consoles, where company controls what you can and what you cant instal, exploit might be the only way. that said, no os is perfect, more os can be confusing but having choice is important

jdwii

“Because XB1 and PS4 can out perform a PC for the same price point with a plug and play feature.”

This is about xbox one exclusives coming to PC .. PS4 exclusives games are only available for the PS4

wow

exclusive to Win10 products** It’s actually smart…
There are an insane amount of hours from people streaming their xbox to their Win10 PC right now. The Win10 Xbox app is insanely good.
Instead of lugging around my XB1 while traveling (i travel a lot), I can play it on my 2lbs ultrabook where ever I go via a rocket stick or hotel wifi.
I really wish OneGuide could be streamed as well.

Marko Novak

So what you have to have your Xbox on at home while you travel? And if it runs over Xbox than what about lag (ping must be terrible)… I still don’t get the point?

wow

you should read up on it. All you need is 10mbps upload speed for high setting. When i’m in the car with a rocket stick or in a hotel using wifi, I don’t get any lag on the very high setting.
You just have to make sure you buy an internet plan with 10+ upload speed, sounds like nothing but most people I know have 100-200mbps download and 10-20mbps upload. Hotels I sometimes get lag and have to put it on the high setting which only needs 8mbps upload.

In the future there won’t be consoles, just closed off store fronts you can download to your PC.
It will be steam vs Windows store, vs PS -Play or whatever, and E-Wii, and Origin, and U-Play, and Acitvision, and Sonic Box *sega’s offering I am predicting*, oh and pretty much every single AAA studio, will have their own storefront. It will be one big ugly mess.

Everyone will then be arguing about how their E-store is better then everyone elses, even though each platform only has like a couple exclusives.

But steam will still be the best so hah! *sticks out tongue!*

Kyle

I’m expecting a war between Steam, GOG, and Origin eventually, with Steam and GOG really duking it out.

Honestly, GOG is slowly turning into a better version of Steam as time goes on. Even Origin in all it’s “your PC may require exorcism after uninstalling” fame has even been doing better lately.

sweet i get to buy a xbox one one every year for 400 bucks to play update AAA titles

wow

probably the most stupid comment on here. I’m hoping that you were joking lmaooo

sublimetalmsg

Yeah it was meant as a joke. I think Phil misses the whole point of static hardware. Its almost like he’s saying buy a PC

IKROWNI

Hasn’t the lines of the Xbox one been blurry since it started?

saintmutt

Since the PC is dying, this is a chance for its revival in form of Xbox.

The future Xbox should be able to work as windows PC as well as a console.

Xbox should become fully hardware upgradable by novices.

It should be modular and all up-gradations should be screwdriver-less and also from front face similar to kitchen pull out shelves.

Say u wanna upgrade processor & Ram for next gen. games simply pull out a module from front face & replace with a new one.

Replacing the HDD — connect new one with USB port, make mirror, pull out old & insert new.

Replacing Motherboard – pull out & replace

Also all the old games should be compatible to new hardware by any means, a big cash rich company like Microsoft should be able to do this, anyway it is a matter of 3D geometry , textures & lighting which do not change .

Also Microsoft should make all games (old also) compatible to VR headset (holo lens)

One big thing Microsoft should plan for future should be Ray Tracing because that is inevitable and the time to prepare for it is now. Ray tracing will make everything change , a geologic shift, and whosoever implements it first , at acceptable FPS , will win the jackpot. For this I propose several processors to work in parallel on different areas of screen/headset in stereo or rather a separate small GPU processor for every pixel to ray trace that pixel.

Another accessary could be a VR-suite. Say a wearable suit with thousands of tiny vibration motors (as in cell phones) to give a feeling of touch , or wind , water , motion which get activated as per situation in the game .

i think that they won’t release a new xbox just will be an Xbox One 2.0 the same API but in a more powerfull hardware

crizz1066

Can only see this as good for lining M$ pockets!!! Would just create a 2 tire system like we have at the moment. High graphically performance etc on the PS4 with the VCR sliding in 2 as usual. Will just cause more issues with update after games release to sort out even more bugs!! Anyway a device you can swap out hardware on sound more like a PC, which is where M$ want to go, then they can save the billions they waste on the X1. Who needs it when you’ve got PC!!

Reginald Peebottom

I think the author is missing the cloud element in all of this and fixating on hardware and its historical limitations. The vision of MS/Xbox of a “unified” gaming platform will come true but only in a cloud based world. Cloud gaming will effectively eliminate a whole host of issues and most importantly create a vast, stable, and captive market to stream funds to MS to play its games anywhere on virtually anything (in theory).

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not a fan of a cloud based tech universe but every indicator (from shrinking discrete GPU and enthusiast PC sales to moves away from productivity software being “physical” to subscription based) all point to its imminent arrival and domination.

Mavrik

Microsoft says they GAF about PC gaming and then look at the PC games on the Windows Store (such as the latest Gears of War: Ultimate Edition). No SLI support, no modding support, no AMD support, no 21:9 support, no .INI fill changing support, etc.

No, Microsoft is not blurring the lines of anything. They still have no idea wtf PC gaming is about.

Paul

It wouldn’t surprise me if the next Xbox console is pretty much a PC, with lower level access now on PC and the cost of PC’s that can compete with consoles not costing much more, it makes a lot of sense, they could do a new console every 2 years and have full backwards compatibility, it wouldn’t surprise me if it even runs the PC version of the game and when it detects the console, stripes out all the grahical settings so it runs more or less like it would on consoles today.

Gamers that don’t want to upgrade don’t have too, they’ll just play the games at lower graphics levels which is pretty much how it is now but at least this way, console gamers that want to upgrade have the choice too, also games wouldn’t be held back as much like they have been by consoles, I see many positives but no real negatives about this idea.

ClevelandSteamer

While this is an interesting proposal…..I really feel that Microsoft has a bit of a little man complex this gen. Only this gen have you heard so extensively about framerate and resolution. Something that used to be kinda a PC only situation. 1080 60fps wasn’t really a target of any console gen and now they are splitting hairs about the performance of both machines. With the Xbox being outsold and slightly outperformed by the PS4 you’re getting this argument on consoles. I’m not against any of it, and actually find it quite amusing seeing how FR and Res were something that console gamers would vehemently state they didn’t care about, but now times seemed to have changed. I find it hard to believe you wouldn’t be paying a premium of Microsoft tax with every upgrade. I mean a console that costs 300 bucks and then 50 a year to keep it online plus upgrades isn’t really that convenient for a console. Run a console for 8 years and it’s an extra 400 bucks just for online. You could run into fragmentation or forced upgrades for certain titles. Microsoft has done this before in the PC space.(Vista for Halo2 and now that awful Windows Store/W10 for the DX12 nightmare Gears of War) PC gamers haven’t really come to terms with Microsoft in those regards, but maybe all of my skepticism is a non-issue but there’s still something about a closed upgrade path that could potentially spell out bad news the Xbox. What about power constraints? Usually to run a bigger better GPU you might need to upgrade your power supply. Unless every aspect of this new Xbox is modular and user upgradable than it already has a glass ceiling. Not to mention what do you do with the old parts? How would one change the processor without getting near the main board? Adding parts to consoles to make them better is almost against the simplicity of a console. The Genesis was a good example of this in the early 90s, it just wasn’t that well implemented or utilized from developers and wasn’t really well received by consumers.

But maybe none of that matters…..I mean I could see Microsoft doing all of this and then Sony just making a newer version of the PS4 with better specs that people can just op for if they wanted. Make the original ps4 cheaper for people who dont care, a faster new one for the ones that do. It would be simple and wouldn’t be viewed as blurring the lines so much between PC and Console. It would just be a clear cut better console. Options are good… and maybe Microsoft could pull it off. But I’m a little skeptical of a company that’s continually fallen through on the PC side of things to turn a Console into a closed PC like box.

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

ExtremeTech Newsletter

Subscribe Today to get the latest ExtremeTech news delivered right to your inbox.

Email

This newsletter may contain advertising, deals, or affiliate links. Subscribing to a newsletter indicates your consent to our
Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe from the newsletter at any time.